Ecosupport - Author(s): Client
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
ecosupport
Land to the Rear of 112
Main Road Emsworth
Author(s):
Aaron Domblides BSc Hons
Client:
PNH Properties Ltd
27th January 2021
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Report Phase II Bat Surveys
Site Name Land to the rear of 112 Main Road, Emsworth
Aaron Domblides BSc (Hons) & Gareth
Author(s)
Ainscough BSc (Hons) MSc
Client PNH Properties Ltd
Date of Issue 27th January 2021
Status Final for submission
www.ecosupport.co.uk Tel:01329 832 841 info@ecosupport.co.uk
1
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Table of Contents
1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 3
1.1 Background ................................................................................................................ 3
1.2 Site Description & Location ........................................................................................ 3
1.3 Proposed Development .............................................................................................. 3
2.0 RELEVANT LEGISLATION & POLICY .................................................................................. 3
2.1 Legislation & Policy Context ....................................................................................... 4
2.1.1 Relevant legislation .............................................................................................. 4
2.1.2 National Planning policy....................................................................................... 4
3.0 METHODS ....................................................................................................................... 7
3.1 Emergence .................................................................................................................. 7
3.2 Walked Transects ....................................................................................................... 8
3.3 Static Monitoring...................................................................................................... 10
4.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................ 12
4.1 Emergence Survey .................................................................................................... 12
4.2 Transect Surveys....................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Static Monitoring...................................................................................................... 14
4.4 Evaluation ................................................................................................................ 15
5.0 MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS ........................................................................... 17
5.1 Minimisation of Disturbance to Nocturnal Wildlife .................................................. 17
5.2 Bat Boxes.................................................................................................................. 18
5.3 Planting .................................................................................................................... 18
6.0 REFERENCES.................................................................................................................. 21
2
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
1.0 INTRODUCTION
1.1 Background
This document outlines the results of the bat surveys carried out by Ecosupport Ltd during
July – October, required in support of a planning application for the development of the land
to the rear of 112 Main Road, Emsworth site. The surveys were recommended within the PEA
report prepared by Ecosupport Ltd (2019) based on the identified presence of Potential Roost
Features (PRFs) within the one of the six surveyed buildings proposed for demolition and
moderate suitability for foraging and commuting bats across the site.
1.2 Site Description & Location
The site comprises of a parcel land located to the rear of 112 Main Road, Emsworth PO10 8AY
(SU 75866 05645) (Fig 1). The east and the west of the site is bounded by grassland habitats
and residential properties, the north by Main Road and residential houses, and to the south
by pasture fields and a car park.
Figure 1. Redline location plan of the site.
1.3 Proposed Development
At this stage the proposals entail the demolition of the existing buildings on site and
subsequent replacement with a number of new residential dwellings and associated parking
areas.
3
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
2.0 RELEVANT LEGISLATION & POLICY
2.1 Legislation & Policy Context
2.1.1 Relevant legislation
The Wildlife & Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) is the primary piece of legislation by which
biodiversity in the UK is protected. The most relevant areas of the Act to development related
activities are:
The protection of certain species listed in Schedule 5, which prohibits killing, injury,
disturbance, damage and / or destruction of breeding sites and / or resting places and sale (it
should be noted that all parts of this protection do not apply to all Scheduled species).
The Natural Environment and Rural Communities (NERC) Act 2006 requires that public bodies
to have regard to the conservation of biodiversity. This means that Planning Authorities must
consider biodiversity when planning or undertaking activities. Section 41 of the Act lists
species found in England which were identified as requiring action under the UK Biodiversity
Action Plan and which continue to be regarded as conservation priorities under the UK Post-
2010 Biodiversity Framework.
2.1.2 National Planning policy
The revised National Planning Policy and Framework (NPPF) (updated 2019) replaces the
previous NPPF and sets out the Government’s vision for biodiversity in England in line with
the country’s 25 Year Environment Plan. The revised NPPF is supported by the National
Planning Practice Guidance (NPPG) (published January 2016, last updated July 2019). The
relevant section of the Guidance concerning biodiversity is ‘Natural Environment: Biodiversity,
Geodiversity and Ecosystems’. Under this Guidance, Local Authorities’ duty to have due regard
to the conservation of biodiversity under the NERC Act (2006) is highlighted.
2.1.3 Local Planning policy
Local planning policy within Chichester is outlined within the Chichester District Council (CDC)
Adopted Chichester Local Plan: Key Policies 2014 – 2029. Within this document the following
policy is relevant to the Districts biodiversity interests:
Policy 48 Natural Environment
Planning permission will be granted where it can be demonstrated that all the following
criteria have been met:
1. There is no adverse impact on: - The openness of the views in and around the coast,
designated environmental areas and the setting of the South Downs National Park; and – The
tranquil and rural character of the area.
2. Development recognizes distinctive local landscape character and sensitively contributes to
its setting and quality;
4
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
3. Proposals respect and enhance the landscape character of the surrounding area and site,
and public amenity through detailed design;
4. Development of poorer quality agricultural land has been fully considered in preference to
best and most versatile land; and
5. The individual identity of settlements, actual or perceived, is maintained and the integrity
of predominantly open and undeveloped land between settlements is not undermined.
Policy 49 Biodiversity
Planning permission will be granted for development where it can be demonstrated that all
the following criteria have been met:
1. The biodiversity value of the site is safeguarded;
2. Demonstrable harm to habitats or species which are protected or which are of importance
to biodiversity is avoided or mitigated;
3. The proposal has incorporated features that enhance biodiversity as part of good design
and sustainable development;
4. The proposal protects, manages and enhances the District’s network of ecology,
biodiversity and geological sites, including the international, national and local designated
sites (statutory and non-statutory), priority habitats, wildlife corridors and stepping stones
that connect them;
5. Any individual or cumulative adverse impacts on sites are avoided;
6. The benefits of development outweigh any adverse impact on the biodiversity on the site.
Exceptions will only be made where no reasonable alternatives are available; and planning
conditions and/or planning obligations may be imposed to mitigate or compensate for the
harmful effects of the development.
Policy 52 Green Infrastructure
Development will be expected to contribute towards the provision of additional green
infrastructure and protect and enhance existing green infrastructure. Planning permission will
be granted where it can be demonstrated that all the following criteria have been met:
1. The proposals maintain and where appropriate contribute to the network of green
infrastructure i.e. public and private playing fields, recreational open spaces, parklands,
allotments and water environments;
5
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
2. The proposals contribute to improving the health and well-being of the local and wider
community;
3. Where appropriate, the proposals incorporate either improvements to existing green
infrastructure or the restoration, enhancement or creation of additional provision/areas;
4. Where appropriate, the proposals incorporate either improvements to existing ecology and
biodiversity or the restoration, enhancement or creation of additional habitat and habitat
networks;
5. Where appropriate, the proposals incorporate either improvements to existing trees,
woodland, landscape features and hedges or the restoration, enhancement or creation of
additional provision/areas;
6. Where appropriate, the proposals create new green infrastructure either through on site
provision or financial contributions. Where on-site provision is not possible financial
contributions will be required and be negotiated on a site by site basis; ‘
6
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
3.0 METHODS
3.1 Emergence
As part of the works undertaken for the Preliminary Ecological Assessment (Ecosupport 2019),
a total of 6 buildings were subject to a roost assessment as they are proposed for demolition
(as per Fig 2). Of the assessed buildings, only No 2 was considered to be of Low roost potential
requiring a single dusk emergence survey, with the remaining buildings considered to be
Negligible potential for roosting bats. This survey was carried out by Aaron Domblides and
Rachel Hill, utilising both heterodyne (Bat Box Duet, Peterson D240x) and full spectrum
(Elekon Batscanner) detectors for identifying species calls. The dusk emergence survey began
approximately 15 minutes prior to sunset and continued until approximately and hour and 20
minutes after sunset. Survey sheets were used to record the following information:
• Time of call registration
• Species (if possible to identify using heterodyne detector)
• Location / activity
• Direction of flight (if seen)
Figure 2. Buildings that were subject to a preliminary roost assessment with building No 2 (low roost
potential) subject to a single dusk emergence survey.
7
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
3.2 Walked Transects
Based on the Moderate habitat suitability assessment, a total of 4 walked transect surveys
conducted from July to October were considered suitable to provide an accurate assessment
of activity of foraging and commuting bats utilising the site. Based on the sites area and
available habitat, a single transect was considered sufficient to cover the whole site, with a
total of 8 listening stations used (Fig 3). One dusk activity transect was conducted per month
in July, August, September and October. Approximately 14 minutes were spent at each
listening point during which passes of species were noted. Any passes recorded whilst walking
between points were also noted. Both a Bat Box duet / Elekon Batscanner heterodyne and
Anabat frequency division (for analysis of calls via sonogram) detector was employed during
all surveys. The surveys were carried out by Adam Jessop (2015-13366-CLS-CLS), Aaron
Domblides, Ned Parker, Julie Trevellick and Rachel Hill.
8
112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Figure 3. Walked transect route (dashed yellow line) with numbered listening points (red dots) used.
9112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
3.3 Static Monitoring
An additional aspect of the recommended bat monitoring within the BCT guidelines (Collins
(ed) 2016) is for static detectors to be placed at different locations along the transect route
for 5 consecutive nights each month. This was achieved using an AnaBat Express detector with
the approximate location of where they were placed each month covered provided below in
Fig 4.
Figure 4. The approximate locations of Anabat Express static detectors across the site. A= July,
B=August, C=September and D=October.
10112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
3.4 Limitations
Due to the lateness of the instruction, it was not possible to carry out a full season of bat
activity work specifically tailored to this site. This however is not considered to pose a
significant limitation on the results of this reports findings due to the poor quality of the
majority of the habitat (glass houses) and nature of the information gathered during the
survey work completed. As such, it is considered a representative example of the bat species
assemblage on site has been established and additional survey work in spring 2020 would not
materially change the findings and / or recommendations of this report.
11112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Emergence Survey
Building 2 (as per Fig 2) was considered to be of Low roost potential and as such a single survey
was required to determine the presence / likely absence of roosting bats. The results of this
survey are provided below (Tables 1 and 2).
Table 1. Relevant information recorded during the emergence surveys including which building were
covered (as the numbers relate to Fig 2).
Start Cloud Wind
Start Finish General
Date Temp Cover (Beaufort
time time information
(°C) (%) scale)
29/07/2019 20 35 3 20:39 22:14 Dry
Table 2. Results from emergence survey carried out on building 2. HNS = Heard Not Seen
Survey Date / Recorded Bat
General Bat Activity on Site
Building Covered Roosts
Species First Pass Last Pass
Common Pipistrelle 21:17 21:50
Soprano Pipistrelle 21:26 21:54
Summary
Overall observed bat activity and species diversity was low,
with only 2 species recorded throughout the duration of the
survey, (Common Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pipistrellus) and
Soprano Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus pygmaeus).
The first registration was at 21:17 from a Common Pipistrelle,
29th July 2019 which was recorded as HNS. Following this one Common
No emergences
(Building No 2) Pipistrelle was observed commuting from west to east in front
of the building at 21:22, with a further 3 HNS registrations
until 21:25. Between 21:31 and 21:50, intermittent Common
Pipistrelle foraging was recorded to the east of the building.
The first registration of a Soprano Pipistrelle was noted at
21:27 commuting from west to east. The only other Soprano
Pipistrelle was HNS at 21:54.
No bats were observed to have emerged from the building
As no bats were recorded roosting within the building on site during the survey, no further
work in regards to roosting bats is required.
12112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
4.2 Transect Surveys
Table 3 below indicates the dates and other relevant information recorded during the walked
transect surveys with the results presented below in Fig 5.
Table 3. Relevant information recorded during the transect surveys. Wind speed is approximated in
the Beaufort Scale.
Wind Starting Point /
Temp Cloud Cover
Date (Beaufort Start Time Finish Time Direction of
(°C) (%)
scale) Travel
31/07/2019 19 0 1 20:48 22:48 5 clockwise
19/08/2019 17 0 3 20:16 22:16 1 clockwise
19/09/19 17 50 1 19:09 21:09 3 clockwise
10/10/19 13 100 1 18:23 20:23 7 clockwise
Figure 5. Graphical representation of the number and species composition of bat recordings noted
during the walked transects (n = 4) at the different listening points from all the surveys (July – October
2018) totalled.
As shown in Fig 5 above, recorded bat activity as a whole was relatively low across the site
and was dominated by Common and Soprano Pipistrelles, with occasional Serotine (Eptesicus
serotinus) and Common Noctule (Nyctalus noctula) also noted. The activity transects also
indicate that the bats prefer the eastern boundary of the site (with listening stations 2 - 5
having similar levels of activity) which is likely as a result of the more developed tree canopy
in comparison to the western boundary. The highest species diversity was recorded at points
4 and 6, with 3 species recorded at each of these locations, both of which are in the southern
portion of the site.
13112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
4.3 Static Monitoring
The results of the static detector monitoring carried out during July – October 2019 are
provided in Table 4 below.
Table 4. Analysis from Anabat Express static deployment from July - October 2019 (see Fig 4 for
approximate location).
Average
Total Average passes
Location Date Species passes per
passes per hour
night
C.pip 304 50.67 6.05
S.pip 380 63.33 7.56
25th - 30th July Serotine 14 2.33 0.28
A
2019 Noctule 5 0.83 0.10
Myotis spp 15 2.50 0.30
Plecotus spp 64 10.67 1.27
C.pip 348 58.00 6.03
S.pip 270 45.00 4.68
15th - 20st Serotine 11 1.83 0.19
B
August 2019 Noctule 3 0.50 0.05
Myotis spp 3 0.50 0.05
Plecotus spp 14 2.33 0.24
C.pip 37 7.40 0.62
S.pip 34 6.80 0.57
20th - 24th Serotine 9 1.80 0.15
C
September Noctule 2 0.40 0.03
Myotis spp 4 0.80 0.07
Plecotus spp 7 1.40 0.12
C.pip 439 87.80 6.95
S.pip 69 13.80 1.09
D 3rd - 7th October Nathusius’ pip 3 0.60 0.05
Serotine 8 1.60 0.13
Noctule 4 0.80 0.06
14112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Myotis spp 13 2.60 0.21
Plecotus spp 43 8.60 0.68
Barbastelle 3 0.60 0.05
Similarly, to the activity transects, the registrations on the Anabat statics were dominated by
Pipistrellus spp, with more Common Pipistrelles recorded than Soprano Pipistrelles. Other
species included occasional Nathusius’ Pipistrelle (Pipistrellus nathusii), Serotine, Noctule
Plecotus spp, Myotis spp and Barbastelle (Barbastellus barbastella). Similarly, to the transects,
activity was higher on the eastern and southern boundaries compared to the western site
boundary (with no suitable locations for statics only the northern boundary due to the lack of
vegetation). Species diversity was also even across all areas of the site, with 6 / 7 species
identified per location.
4.4 Evaluation
Relatively low numbers of Common and Soprano Pipistrelles (considered to be common bats
in England), were recorded foraging and commuting on site as well as occasional Nathusius
Pipistrelle, Myotis spp, Plecotus spp, Noctule and Serotine (with these species considered
common and rarer in England (Wray et al 2010)). Commuting and foraging activity was largely
restricted to individual bats with 3 commuting registrations of Barbastelle also recorded in
October (one of the rarest species). Guidance on valuing bat foraging and commuting habitat
is provided by Wray et al (2010), which uses a points-based system. Using this system, the site
scores 32 points for commuting bats and 14 points for foraging bats (see Table 5) and is
correspondingly considered to be of Local value for foraging bats and Regional value for
commuting1.
1
This score is somewhat artificially skewed by the 3 registration of Barbastelle recorded in October.
Although an important consideration in any lighting strategy as a species that can commute great
distances in a single night, with only 3 registrations it is not considered the site forms parts of a well
use corridor.
15112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Table 5. Valuation of habitat for (a) commuting and (b) foraging bats after Wray et al. (2010). The
points scored by the site are indicated in bold type.
Species Number of Roosts nearby Habitat features
bats
(a) Commuting habitat
Common Individual
None (1) Absence of (other) linear features (1)
(2) bats (5)
Un-vegetated fences and large field
Small number (3)
sizes (2)
Walls, gappy or flailed hedges,
Small Moderate number/not
Rarer (5) isolated well grow hedges,
numbers (10) known (4)
moderate field sizes (3)
Large number of roosts or
Well grown and well-connected
close to a SSSI for the species
hedges, small field sizes (4)
(5)
Complex network of well-established
Rarest Large Close or within a SAC for the
hedges, small fields and rivers/
(20) numbers (20) species (20)
streams (5)
(b) foraging habitat
Common Individual Industrial or other site without
None (1)
(2) bats (5) established legislation (1)
Suburban areas or intensive arable
Small number (3)
land (2)
Isolated woodland patches, less
Small Moderate number/not
Rarer (5) intensive arable and/or small
numbers (10) known (4)
towns/villages (3)
Large number of roosts or Larger or connected woodland
close to a SSSI for the species blocks, mixed agriculture and small
(5) villages/hamlets (4)
Rarest Large Close or within a SAC for the Mosaic of pasture, woodlands and
(20) numbers (20) species (20) wetland areas (5)
16112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
5.0 MITIGATION & RECOMMENDATIONS
5.1 Minimisation of Disturbance to Nocturnal Wildlife
A new document (Guidance Note 08/18 Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK) has recently
been produced via a collaboration between the Institute of Lighting Professionals (ILP) and
the Bat Conservation Trust (BCT), which outlines the latest recommendations to minimise the
impacts of increased artificial lighting on bats. The key recommendations within this
document have been outlined below and will be implemented with the aim of keeping any
light spill onto boundary hedges / tree lines below at or below 1 Lux.
‘Luminaires come in a myriad of different styles, applications and specifications which a
lighting professional can help to select. The following should be considered when choosing
luminaires:
• All luminaires should lack UV elements when manufactured. Metal halide, fluorescent
sources should not be used. LED luminaires should be used where possible due to their
sharp cut-off, lower intensity, good colour rendition and dimming capability.
• A warm white spectrum (ideally112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Figure 6. (a) Shield ‘barn doors’ (b) cowl hood; (c) shield and; (d) external louvre Images from ILP (2011).
5.2 Bat Boxes
It is recommended that bat boxes are erected within retained trees on site (or purpose built
wooden poles if appropriate trees are not available) to help enhance the roosting
opportunities for the bat population using the site for foraging. The boxes will be a mixture of
Schwegler woodcrete models (as these are longer lasting than wooden ones) and will include
the two 2F (with double front panel), two 2 FN and three large colony boxes (1FS). These boxes
will be placed at a minimum height of 3 m off ground level and will be done so by, or under
the supervision of an ecologist. The placement of the boxes should be secured via an
appropriately worded condition.
5.3 Planting
Any planting on site will seek to make use of species of known benefit to bats following
recommendations within the BCTs Landscape and Urban Design for Bats and Biodiversity
(Gunnell et al., 2012) (Fig 7).
18112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
Fig 7. Screenshot from appendix within Gunnell et al., (2012) indicating plant species of known benefit
to bats that will form the basis of on-site planting.
19112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
20112 Main Road, Emsworth Phase II Bat Surveys Amended January 2021
6.0 REFERENCES
Collins (ed) (2016) Bat Surveys for Professional Ecologists: Best Practice Guidelines. Bat
Conservation Trust
Ecosupport (2019) 112 main road, Emsworth, Preliminary Ecological Appraisal.
Gunnell, K., Grant, G., & Williams, C., (2012) Landscape and Urban Design for Bats and
Biodiversity
ILP / BCT (2018) Guidance Note 08/18 Bats and Artificial Lighting in the UK
Wray, S., Wells, D., Long, E. & Mitchell-Jones, T. (2010). Valuing Bats in Ecological Impact
Assessment. In Practice. 70. 23-25.
21You can also read
